>
> Instead of "[...] contains only the bindings [...]" in null-environment
> and scheme-report-environment descriptions (page 51, section 6.1)
> I propose "contains bindings", without "only". In the description
> of environment I propose using "implementation-specific (possibly
> empty)" instead of "empty".


Thank you.  This helps, but it's still not clear enough.  I've filed Ticket
#350 <http://trac.sacrideo.us/wg/ticket/350> to make sure that we improve
this language.


> Right. I know I'm being too pedantic here, but I still want to point
> out that I can't name my library (lib 802000) and expect the name
> to work everywhere: the report allows, but does not guarantee that
> it's a valid library name.


Alex has filed a ticket that mandates a minimum range for exact integers.
 We'll probably have to vote on that, i.e. on what specific range will be
required.


>  The top level of a program may also include import declarations.
>  In a library declaration, it is an error to import the same
>  identifier more than once with different bindings, or to redefine
>  or mutate an imported binding with define, define-syntax or set!.
>  However, a REPL should permit these actions.
>
> So, overlapping imports, redefinitions, etc. are not allowed in
> library declarations, allowed in the REPL, but what about the top
> level? The paragraph above should say something about top level.
>

I've filed Ticket #351 <http://trac.sacrideo.us/wg/ticket/351> for this.

Not every terminal is vt100-compatible (although that sequence is
> rather portable), not every scheme outputs to a terminal, not every
> scheme can output to a terminal (e.g. DrRacket), and not all operating
> systems even have such a concept (e.g. Windows). What if I'll want
> to run the example?
>

The comment explaining what that line does will be clear to everyone.  If
you're not using a VT100-compatible terminal, change the code to invoke
your implementation's clear-screen operation.  That isn't asking a lot.  Or
just remove it.
_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports

Reply via email to